@Bobsonsirjonny

How does old debt get cancelled without a bankruptcy judge declaring the debt cancelled?

(allegedly )

_________________
"If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you." - Oscar Wilde

IMHO It's a way better oportunity to take adavantage of the PPC vacum left by Apple rather than trying to get a niche in the same market as them and the Wintel domination, specially with the push up PPC is getting with all the new consoles using it.

@Rogue
Quote:

because Amiga Inc cannot give you a license for something they don't have...

And who has it ? Unfortunately no matter how much we like the Classic, giving support for a platform without even knowing it's owner(s?) or long term plans doesn't cut it for many of us.

Last edited by Jose on 21-Jul-2006 at 07:41 PM.
Last edited by Jose on 21-Jul-2006 at 07:40 PM.

_________________

José

@Rogue

Quote:

You make the mistake to assume that you could easily just go to Amiga and ask for an x86 license, but you fail to acknowledge that this isn't possible at all, because Amiga Inc cannot give you a license for something they don't have...

So they have sold an exclusive x86 license to someone already?

@Jose

Quote:

And who has it ?

Well, since we probably won't find out any time soon, let's guess:

Commodore?

Sony?

Bill Gates Incorporated?

BBRV?


See, how when things get left to the imagination, the imagination can probably make it worse than it really is!

@nzv58l

Gateway ?

_________________
AmigaOne XE G3/933/VIA/FM801/R200 (fixed),
G3SE/600/Voodoo3/Sil680/RTL8139/SBLive! (noiseless!)
µA1-MK2/G3/933/R200/CMI8738
XE/G4 (broken 7450/800)

@Jorge

Just a small story, what I just stumbled across.

AFAIK it was Bill and Fleecy's company called "Amino" (something) or what which bought the Amiga assets from Gateway. This might have included the "Amiga" brand name and the legacy AmigaOS (up to 3.x).

I was just recently browsing thru Opera's website, and coincidently stumbled accross a UK based company, named "Amino Communications" who builds set top boxes. They use Opera as an embedded browser in their set top box. The next funy thing is, they made an exclusive deal with the "Telecom Austria" to equip their DSL based "Internet Television" service with Amino's (and now hold on) "AmiNET" based set top boxes. "AmiNET" !! AmiNET is their range of settop boxes, ranging from a small one, the AmiNET 103 to the AmiNET 500, and the AmiNET 110 and 130 for busyness (e.g. Hospitals and Hotels).

What a coincident...

Sorry, that was so OT, but IMO refreshing.

Link, BTW: http://www.aminocom.com/index.html

Last edited by Jorge on 21-Jul-2006 at 10:52 PM.
Last edited by Jorge on 21-Jul-2006 at 10:51 PM.

_________________
AmigaOne XE G3/933/VIA/FM801/R200 (fixed),
G3SE/600/Voodoo3/Sil680/RTL8139/SBLive! (noiseless!)
µA1-MK2/G3/933/R200/CMI8738
XE/G4 (broken 7450/800)

@BrianK

Quote:

So they have sold an exclusive x86 license to someone already?

No. Read my other post.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@Jose

Quote:

And who has it ? Unfortunately no matter how much we like the Classic, giving support for a platform without even knowing it's owner(s?) or long term plans doesn't cut it for many of us.

As I said many times before, don't try to read between the lines. There is nothing in there.

_________________
Seriously, if you want to contact me do not bother sending me a PM here. Write me a mail

@Rogue

Quote:

I wonder what you checked, because this is incorrect. Parts of AmigaOS 4.0 belong to others; for example, ExecSG does neither belong to Amiga Inc. NOR Hyperion.

Bottom line is that Hyperion doesn't own it, and I was addressing my comments at the owners of the brand, IP and OS, in the past, present and future.

Quote:

What else? AmigaOS 3.x is old, 4.0 is current. AROS? It's already there on x86, for quite a long time (yeah, irony again). MorphOS then? I'm sorry, if you are talking AmigaOS, there is no way around Hyperion or OS 4. Unless you want to start at 3.1 again and go the long way again, but I assure you that this is not going to work.

Do you mean to tell us that Hyperion have the final say on what the current and/or owners of the Amiga brand, IP and OS can do in the future? I think not. Speak for Hyperion, but please don't presume to speak on behalf of the current and future owners of the technology until/if Hyperion becomes the new owners.

Last edited by elatour on 21-Jul-2006 at 11:28 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@Rogue

Quote:

You make the mistake to assume that you could easily just go to Amiga and ask for an x86 license, but you fail to acknowledge that this isn't possible at all, because Amiga Inc cannot give you a license for something they don't have...

I did not a mistake in assuming anything because I said no such thing in the first place. You keep thinking that this is only about you, Hyperion and OS4, when it just isn't. You're the one making assumptions. And just what is your fixation on x86 anyway? There is more to the success of a product than the underlying technology it uses, let alone just one (i.e. the processor) of the many other technology components needed in this case. I also brought up the many other platforms, whether virtual or physical that have been shot down by various people for various other reasons.

Last edited by elatour on 21-Jul-2006 at 11:40 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@Rogue

So who exactly sold Hyperion the license to port AOS to PPC anyway? Last I heard, it was Amiga Inc. Is this not the case? So are you telling us here and now that Amiga Inc. has some kind of exclusive PPC license for AOS and cannot issue a license to others wishing to do a non-PPC platform port like it did to you for the PPC?

Please feel free to enlighten us on any of this. I'm just rivetted to find out more about this ever so convoluted and retarded licensing arrangement between Amiga Inc., Hyperion and Eyetech.

It just gets better and better every month! One more reason for someone to please buy the whole Amiga enchilada (brand, IP and OS) in the future and take a page from other's successful ventures. One thing is for sure, this 8 year saga that is Amiga Inc. can hardly be called a successful venture thus far!

Last edited by elatour on 21-Jul-2006 at 11:59 PM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@elatour

Remember that Amiga Inc is only licensing the stuff themselves, it all still belongs to Gateway. So it's entirely possible that Amiga Inc's licensing terms have a non-compete clause in them, which would be violated by an x86 Amiga (which would compete with the x86 Gateway PCs)

This is all 100% pure undiluted speculation, of course. I must admit that Rogue's comment caught me by surprise too.

@CodeSmith

He means that they can`t grant a license for it because it doesn`t exist.

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -

@Crumb

Quote:

for pixel shaders you use a graphic card, not the cpu.

Pixel shaders are just vector units and Intel builds these vector units in IGPs.

Refer to why Intel markets the “Centrino” platform (CPU/NB/SB/IGP/WiFi/LAN stack).

AMD’s equivalent initiative is AMD “Yamato”(or "Turion**") laptop reference platform.

**AMD "Turion" without platform stack is known to be Athlon 64 Mobile ("Odessa" and "Oakville") 35Watts.

Quote:

And an Core duo also needs a Northbridge, your point is?

Didn't you notice power consumption between IBM CPC925/CPC945 Northbridges vs ATI and Intel Northbridges. Same reason why you don’t see many nVIDIA nForce chipset based laptops. nForce 5 for example consumes 30 watts which unacceptable from a laptop perspective.

Quote:

Cell isn't finished yet

Mitac 8355 laptop with Athlon 64 mobile and ATI M10P has total system power of ~50 Watts while running a DX game. What is wattage of STI’s Cell again? Hint: ~80 Watts.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@Crumb

Quote:

Although it's totally offtopic: I usually wonder what interest you have on Amiga/AmigaOS, you seem more interested in posting AMD/Intel benchmarks than in Amiga stuff, enjoying your amiga or doing anything with amigaos software.

Personal issues is irrelevant in this case.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@CodeSmith

Quote:

Remember that Amiga Inc is only licensing the stuff themselves, it all still belongs to Gateway. So it's entirely possible that Amiga Inc's licensing terms have a non-compete clause in them, which would be violated by an x86 Amiga (which would compete with the x86 Gateway PCs) This is all 100% pure undiluted speculation, of course. I must admit that Rogue's comment caught me by surprise too.

Very interesting. I was not aware of this. Many thanks for the info.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@Frags

Quote:

He means that they can`t grant a license for it because it doesn`t exist.

"It" being WHAT exactly? I thought Rogue was referring to the fact that "IT" not being available to license was actually the IP to the OS, which Rogue implies Amiga Inc. doesn't own or have the right to be able to grant a license to it. So you're saying "IT", meaning the IP, doesn't exist?!?!? Huh? Maybe I'm just dense, but I'm really confused now!

What I think is more likely is that the IP to the OS was granted to Amiga for licensing to others, but that like Codesmith speculated, that something in that license between Gateway to Amiga Inc. might actually be preventing them from competing on the same hardware platform. The only thing that even remotely makes sense about this, seeing as Gateway is a hardware company and should not give a damn about having another OS run on their hardware, is that they may have thought that it may have harmed their relationship with or broken some other legal agreement with their main cash cow - Microsoft.

This fear may have been the case 8 years ago, but may not be as relevant today, or may hopefully not be in the future. Here's wishing this is the case.

Of course, like Codesmith said, this is obviously complete speculation on our part and we may never know the real story unless some brave soul evntually spills the beans if they think nobody will care enough to follow legal action at that point.

Last edited by elatour on 22-Jul-2006 at 03:37 AM.
Last edited by elatour on 22-Jul-2006 at 03:36 AM.
Last edited by elatour on 22-Jul-2006 at 03:32 AM.
Last edited by elatour on 22-Jul-2006 at 03:22 AM.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@Hammer

Quote:

Hammer wrote: Quote: for pixel shaders you use a graphic card, not the cpu. Pixel shaders are just vector units and Intel builds these vector units in IGPs.

The difference is that these vector units are locked into a graphics pipeline. I have written GLSL pixel shaders and I can tell you that you can't use them efficiently for general-purpose vector computation. They can be used fairly efficiently for graphics and most image processing operations. Some finite-element simulations also work well. However, for general purpose stuff, the graphics pipeline just isn't flexible enough.For example, a pixel shader can only output up to four values placed into a single RGBA pixel. There's no random write capability, restricting the kind of operations one can perform. GPUs also don't offer read-modify-write operations meaning that for iterative algorithms you need two buffers that are swapped between read and write operations.

This lack of flexibility is why pixel shaders offer more processing power than Altivec or SSE. It allows the GPU designer to get use the interconnect space and extra logic required to allow general purpose computing for more vector units. Altivec and SSE for the main CPU are still important due to the fact that they can be used for general purpose computations.

Hans

Last edited by Hans on 22-Jul-2006 at 03:34 AM.

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

On continuing note about Apple's success, here's something new:

Time for a bite of Apple? Yes, analysts say

Obviously, some people think the future is rosy for Apple, at least for the the near to mid term anyway.

Hard to believe that this company came so close to bankrupcy at least twice only to come back from near dead with a vengeance. Then again, financial analysts have been wrong too many times before, so I wouldn't exactly bet the proverbial farm on this one! ...ain'tit grand to play devil's advocate!?!?

Again, more food for thought.

_________________
When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids...

@elatour

Quote:

..Gateway is a hardware company and should not give a damn about having another OS run on their hardware, is that they may have thought that it may have harmed their relationship with or broken some other legal agreement with their main cash cow - Microsoft.

< tinfoil hat>

That would make sense. If Amiga started competing in the x86 space, however small that would be right now, it could warrant a reprimand against Gateway from MS. And that is the LAST thing they need right now. Their margins are slim the way it is.

I wouldn't put it past MS though. They're getting sued for 400 million Euro's by the EU for a reason.

< /tinfoil hat>

Last edited by Legion on 22-Jul-2006 at 05:29 AM.
Last edited by Legion on 22-Jul-2006 at 05:28 AM.

_________________
...wait... what?